In a recent landmark case, Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India ("Navtej"), the Indian Supreme Court broke new ground by declaring parts of the Indian equivalent of Section 377A of our Penal Code to be unconstitutional.
This promptly reignited local debate as to whether private sexual acts between males (or homo-sex for short) should be similarly decriminalised in Singapore. Section 377A, which penalises only male homo-sex, is regarded by many as an anachronistic expression of Victorian morality imposed on several British colonies. Far from expressing a universal morality, the sentiments inspiring this provision seem to be misaligned with the contemporary social mores of a multi-cultural, multi-religious and secular society.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Read the full story and more at $9.90/month
Get exclusive reports and insights with more than 500 subscriber-only articles every month
ST One Digital
$9.90/month
No contract
ST app access on 1 mobile device
Unlock these benefits
All subscriber-only content on ST app and straitstimes.com
Easy access any time via ST app on 1 mobile device
E-paper with 2-week archive so you won't miss out on content that matters to you